Brand New Blood Card

by PoppyR 92 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Rabbit


    Fifteen years fading. No 'shepharding calls' ever. I consider myself a successful fader. I get up to use the restroom in a private hospital and, with IV tubes still in my arms, BAM!! I am face-to-face with questions about whether or not I consider myself one of Jehovah's witnesses. Did I take blood? Am I disfellowshipped? Do I want to talk to the elders? Why did I leave? Is there anything he can do while he's there? Am I sure that no other elders have visited me in the past 6 days? because a different person is assigned for each day and I should have been receiving daily visits.

    As a 'sucessful fader' myself, I was very shocked at your experience. I am glad you are over your medical problems...and thank you, I am doing just fine, too.

    Your situation and all the great comments and info from other posters on your thread needs to be read by everyone. If major mistakes could be made over and over by the hospitals for me and you...everyone should consider it may have happened in their cases, too.

    What was the eventual outcome of your situation ? (If you don't mind sharing) I hope everyone checks their info ASAP. Don't wait until you come in on a stretcher -- unconscious.

    You might just have a smiling JW Ex-spouse, saying, "So, Doc, you think he/she REALLY can't live without a transfusion ? Sorry, it's against his/her beliefs -- even if they DO hafta' die."


  • ozziepost
    giving permission to the hospital liason committee to see your notes and medical records

    and still the R&F won't see that they're in a cult!

  • rebel8

    FWIW I am skeptical a hospital would accept this "release of information authorization" to the hospital liason committee. I'll wait until I see the exact words, but......most hospitals with any common sense would require specific wording instead of just saying "let anyone who says they're part of the JW Hospital Liason Committee unbridled access to my medical records". Try to get info released from a hospital without using their own forms and you're in for a difficult time of it. I just don't believe too many hospitals will be stupid enough to let HLC members read medical records based upon the wording on a little card.

    The WTS can put whatever nonsense they want to put on their cards, but that doesn't mean hospitals are dumb enough to follow it, nor are they obligated to. Another aware that just because someone has authorized access, it does not mean the hospital must allow the person immediate access. Hospitals are well within their rights (and common sense) to allow supervised access and only when it is convenient for the hospital.

    Telling clergy members you're in the hospital and your room # is allowed, but reading medical records is a different thing entirely, requiring a wordy document to be signed.

    Here are exerpts from explanations of US federal law (HIPAA), explaining what authorizations must include. Be aware many states have their own laws about confidentiality of medical info that add additional requirements.

    An authorization must specify a number of elements, including a description of the protected health information to be used and disclosed, the person authorized to make the use or disclosure, the person to whom the covered entity may make the disclosure, an expiration date, and, in some cases, the purpose for which the information may be used or disclosed.
    May a covered entity use or disclose a patient’s entire medical record based on the patient’s signed Authorization?
    Yes, as long as the Authorization describes, among other things, the information to be used or disclosed by the covered entity in a "specific and meaningful fashion," and is otherwise valid under the Privacy Rule. See 45 CFR 164.508(b)(1) and 164.508(c)(1)(i). An Authorization would be valid if it authorized the covered entity to use or disclose an "entire medical record" or "complete patient file." On the other hand, without further definition, an Authorization to use or disclose "all protected health information" might not be sufficiently specific, since protected health information encompasses a wider range of information than that which is typically understood to be included in the medical record, and individuals are less likely to understand the breadth of information that may be defined as "protected health information."

    (c) Implementation specifications: Core elements and requirements--

    (1) Core elements. A valid authorization under this section must contain

    at least the following elements:

    (i) A description of the information to be used or disclosed that

    identifies the information in a specific and meaningful fashion.

    (ii) The name or other specific identification of the person(s), or

    class of persons, authorized to make the requested use or disclosure.

    (iii) The name or other specific identification of the person(s), or

    class of persons, to whom the covered entity may make the requested use

    or disclosure.

    (iv) A description of each purpose of the requested use or

    disclosure. The statement ``at the request of the individual'' is a

    sufficient description of the purpose when an individual initiates the

    authorization and does not, or elects not to, provide a statement of the


    (v) An expiration date or an expiration event that relates to the

    individual or the purpose of the use or disclosure. The statement ``end

    of the research study,'' ``none,'' or similar language is sufficient if

    the authorization is for a use or disclosure of protected health

    information for research, including for the creation and maintenance of

    a research database or research repository.

    (vi) Signature of the individual and date. If the authorization is

    signed by a personal representative of the individual, a description of

    such representative's authority to act for the individual must also be


    (2) Required statements. In addition to the core elements, the

    authorization must contain statements adequate to place the individual

    on notice of all of the following:

    (i) The individual's right to revoke the authorization in writing,

    and either:

    (A) The exceptions to the right to revoke and a description of how

    the individual may revoke the authorization

    All the things the authorization must include are listed in the last quote, from the Code of Federal Regulations. I would like to see the wording on the blood card to analyze it against the federal regulations.

  • Diogenes

    I had my meeting Tuesday night and the thing that disturbed me the most was the fact that you need to photocopy your blood card and give copies to the people who witnessed your signature (elders no doubt!)

    I was just going to sign and throw it away but now that seems rather difficult.

  • blondie

    Actually, I find this very confusing. The WTS has been pushing durable power of attorneys for healthcare where if you are unconscious, you have selected an individual and a backup to speak and act for you in a health situation. That would mean that as soon as you are unconscious that kicks in overriding or conflicting with any permission given to the HLC. The POA would have the power of making decisions. Is this a segment added to the HCPOA?

    Even as an active JW I would never have given the HLC, a group of imperfect men who have no medical degrees, permission to see my medical information. My experience with the HLC:

    Blondie: Brother HLC member, I was reading that we can now accept blood fractions made from red blood cells, like Polyheme. Is that true?

    HLC: Sister, you have to check with your doctor regarding medical procedures.

    Blondie: Brother HLC, I'm not asking about whether it is good medically but allowed scripturally.

    HLC: Sister, you will have to talk to your doctor.

    I find to hard that the above brother is going to want to go through my medical records and make a medical decision. Is he going to provide the information to someone else in the WT hierarchy?

  • ozziepost
    I was just going to sign and throw it away but now that seems rather difficult.

    throw the elders away?

  • Mysterious

    Maybe this was answered already but are there new cards for the under 18 unbaptized dubbies too?

  • Pistoff

    If this new blood card really does include this provision, then lawsuits are in the WT's future.

    By asking to look at the medical history of the person, the implication is made that the elders are DIRECTLY involved in the medical treatment and management of the person's health.

    This seems to fly in the face of AVOIDING participation in the process that the WT claims, as in the sex abuse scandal, etc: "we did not mandate anything, we did not advise, we did not control."

    I will believe this when I see it in the US.

    Till then, it remains too Orwellian to believe.

  • rebel8
    By asking to look at the medical history of the person, the implication is made that the elders are DIRECTLY involved in the medical treatment and management of the person's health.

    That is a very good point. Are there any current/former HLC members who can explain the purpose of reviewing medical records and what was done with the info extracted from the record? I assume the purpose would be surveillance to ensure the JW didn't accept blood, but I can easily envision local HLCs going overboard with their power and giving medical advice.

  • MidwichCuckoo
    permission to the hospital liason committee to see your notes and medical records

    lol - like they'll UNDERSTAND them? ridiculous....for WHAT purpose???/

Share this